Photon sphere vs horizon as a null suface

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the properties of photon orbits in Schwarzschild geometry, specifically the relationship between the photon sphere at r=3M and the event horizon at r=2M. Participants explore the implications of light cones and null surfaces within this context, addressing questions about the behavior of photons and light rays in these regions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that while photons can orbit at r=3M, the causal diagram suggests they should not remain at constant r, raising questions about the role of other coordinates (theta and phi).
  • Another participant clarifies that at the horizon (r=2M), light rays can travel outward while remaining at constant r, contrasting this with the behavior of light at the photon sphere.
  • A participant emphasizes that the diagram in question only represents radial motion and does not account for orbits, suggesting that the light cone is a four-dimensional construct.
  • Discussion includes the idea that light rays directed inward from the horizon travel inward, while those directed outward maintain constant r=2M.
  • One participant expresses a realization that the use of Schwarzschild coordinates can be misleading regarding the nature of light cones at r=2M, and that advanced coordinates provide a clearer picture.
  • A participant proposes that there are null geodesics that can remain at fixed coordinates (theta_0, phi_0, r=2M) over time, questioning whether this understanding is correct.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying interpretations of the behavior of light at the photon sphere and the horizon, indicating that multiple competing views remain. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the implications of these observations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in understanding due to the choice of coordinates, which may obscure the true nature of light behavior in these regions. The discussion highlights the complexity of geodesics and the need for careful consideration of different coordinate systems.

Jip
Messages
20
Reaction score
2
Hi ,
There's something I don't get regarding the orbits of photons in Schwarzschild geometry.

As well known, by solving geodesics equation for null rays, you get that photons can be in a (unstable) circular orbit at r=3 M. However, if you look at the causal diagram for Schwarzschild geometry (in Schwarzschild coordinates, say), then you see that the light cones are still open.

So, according to this diagram, a photon should go left (towards decreasing r) or right (increasing r), but not straight at r=cst! Is the solution somewhere hidden in the two other coordinates theta and phi?

I have another, but related question. The light cone gets degenerate with no extension at r=2M, as you see again on this causal diagram. In other words, the horizon is a null surface, which is a general property anyway. But if the horizon is a null surface, why don't photons actually move along this null surface? Instead, they just cross inwards.

To summarize, I would have expected the photon sphere to be precisely the horizon, since for me I have this (wrong) idea in head : null surface <-> photon sphere

Where is the mistake?

Thanks a lot
 
Physics news on Phys.org
At the horizon r = 2M, the light rays (not "photons") that generate the null surface travel outward. Remaining at constant r = 2M of course.

r = 3M is not a null surface. The light rays that go sideways travel in circular orbits.
 
Last edited:
Jip said:
So, according to this diagram, a photon should go left (towards decreasing r) or right (increasing r), but not straight at r=cst! Is the solution somewhere hidden in the two other coordinates theta and phi?
Yes. The diagram shows only radial motion (constant [itex]\theta[/itex] and [itex]\phi[/itex]) and so can't show orbits. The light cone is a 4-D cone and the diagram you refer to (I assume) shows only 2 dimensions.
 
Jip said:
I have another, but related question. The light cone gets degenerate with no extension at r=2M, as you see again on this causal diagram. In other words, the horizon is a null surface, which is a general property anyway. But if the horizon is a null surface, why don't photons actually move along this null surface? Instead, they just cross inwards.

A light ray directed inward from the horizon travels inward. A light ray directed outward from the horizon maintains constant r=2M, so on a Penrose diagram it just travels along that diagonal line until it gets to [itex]\mathscr{I}^+[/itex].
 
A light ray directed outward from the horizon maintains constant r=2M, so on a Penrose diagram it just travels along that diagonal line until it gets to I+

Hi,
Thanks for the replies. Now I understand better.

-For the photon sphere, a light ray can travel inward or outward at r=3M, but it might also somehow balance gravity with some radial speed + an orthoradial speed (roughly speaking, it's just a way to visualize what's going on; I think the anology with an accoustic black hole helps here, where I guess you can have a circular sonic wave orbiting around the sonic horizon (?))

-Regarding the light cones at r=2M. I think I was fooled by the use of Schwarzschild coordinates. In these coordinates, the light cone schrinks and has no extension anymore at r=2M. So, naively, you think that light rays must stay at r=2M. However in advanced Eddigthon-Finkelstein coordinates, you rather see that the light cone is not degenerate, and that, as you say, the light ray outward stays at r=2M, all the others fall towards the singularity. I have to see this as well on the Penrose diagram.

My confusion came from the fact that if you stay at r=2M, then you are in a circular orbit. But it is wrong. You can be static as well!

So, if I understood correctly, there are null geodesics that stay forever at some point $theta_0$, $\phi_0$, $r=2M$, $\forall t$. Is that right?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
626
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
2K